This case is an appeal brought by Energy Alabama challenging the Alabama Public Service Commission’s decision to block us from intervening in Alabama Power’s Energy Cost Recovery (Rate ECR) docket, arguing that the Commission used an overly narrow and unprecedented definition of what constitutes a “proceeding” in order to shut out public participation. In our briefing, Energy Alabama contends that the Commission has treated an active docket—with ongoing cost adjustments affecting millions in fuel pass-through charges—as if no proceeding existed at all, preventing transparency, discovery, or scrutiny of costs that ultimately land on customers’ bills. The Commission and Alabama Power counter that because no formal procedural steps (such as a formal filing requesting adjustment) were underway, there was no proceeding in which to intervene, framing public oversight efforts as unnecessary and disruptive. After losing at the Montgomery Circuit Court, Energy Alabama seeks reversal from the Alabama Supreme Court, arguing the Commission’s position undermines ratepayer rights and the statutory framework intended to balance public and utility interests rather than insulate regulated monopolies from scrutiny.